to Reduce the speed or to drive better ?

There is nothing more unbearable than death by accident, on a road, which comes to interrupt an abrupt end to the happiness of a life, there is nothing more unbearable as a time when constables come to announce the death of a child, a brother, a father…

Limit the number of people killed on the roads is a collective duty. How to do it in the most efficient way possible, without impeding the mobility of a part of the population, and without that some motorists have the impression that the fines will be a new tax targeting those who depend on their car, those, therefore, who do not have the means to live in the downtowns of cities ? Immediately, we hear the specialists of road safety is crying : there will be no more fines, drivers only have to comply with the new limitations. It is to forget that the vast majority of PV punishes small excess of speed. Less than 10 km/h is exceeded, sometimes only 2 or 3. This reduction in the permitted speed on the roads would probably be better accepted if it was accompanied by a reflection on the real causes of accidents.

“This reduction in the permitted speed on the roads would probably be better accepted if it was accompanied by a reflection on the real causes of accidents.”


If the speed increases the severity of the accident, it is first of all when the driver wanders, that it is dangerous. And inattention can be caused by many different factors, mobile phone, alcohol and drugs, fatigue… It is in the first place on these factors it is necessary to act. But it is especially necessary to ask why our German neighbors allow a speed of 100 km/h on this type of roads with fewer accidents.

probably because they drive better and are more respectful of other drivers. Respect the safety distances, to fall back on the right for not cluttering up the left lane and don’t encourage other bad drivers in double to the right… many of the behaviors that fall under the education, citizenship,.

one speak, the others must be silenced

can women think differently than other women ? Can they hear a different music in the tumult of the movement of “freedom of speech”, which takes up the western world ? It would seem that the word is available to you for that all say the same thing. Dissent is unwelcome. Catherine Deneuve has included in its costs, it has signed a text written by women writers, journalists, the least we can say is that they weigh their words and measure the range of ideas. We may not share all of their words. One may think that this is not the freedom to annoy that he had to be put in before but we docked, even cavalier dismissal (and we said “cavalier” and not “rough”).

Catherine Deneuve has signed up to the forum controversy.


The shades are still audible in a debate, if tense, where visibly no dissent is tolerated ? These women wanted to mark their attachment to freedom, they wanted to also mean that the emancipation of women does not pass through their confinement in a victim status and that there is a major difference between the claims to be able to move in public space without fear of assault and the comments salacious, and the speech vengeful and dogmatic of some activists who think that a hand on a knee by a man that we know and who is trying his luck abuse is also despicable to be caught by a stranger in a corridor of the metro.

Finally, these women are artists who have expressed their concern to hear now as an evidence that such and such a work is “not feminist enough” or “perpetuates male domination”, in a temptation to clean up the literature in the name of the Property. Is this issue still in the field-democratic, or is there an official religion that would tolerate no heretical ?

Behind Lactalis, a system of death

Lactalis, the first company in the world of milk, would therefore have left out of stocks of powder milk for infants, so she knew for weeks, and its plant is contaminated by bacteria of the genus salmonella. The distribution system has left the boxes on the shelf after the recall of Lactalis.

How can there be there ? The facility would load Lactalis to exempt a system of which the dairy business is that the most avid representative. The giant dairy weighs 17 billion of turnover. It refuses to publish its accounts, but its margins are 10.5 % while he pays to the French breeders of the milk below its cost price, leading them to ruin and, for some, suicide. He did not hesitate to throw away the stigma for years on raw milk cheeses, explaining that they were dangerous, while he himself retained some marks of camembert from raw milk, to ruin the few artisan producers that he was still competition.

control of tins of baby milk by the DGCCRF.


Those who praise the “success” of this flagship of French industry, are probably not counted in the number of jobs destroyed, agriculture ruined… no-one wants the closure of a factory, the dismissal of employees. But the giant dairy has so often practiced the blackmail at employment to force the French administration to turn a blind eye on its practices…

Will we finally understand that a system that lets large retailers require its suppliers for ever-lower prices, forcing them to produce at low cost, thus lowering the quality (for example, by feeding cows with maize silage potentially carrying bacteria) leads us all to ruin ? Lactalis is only the tip of the iceberg on which we are all going to shipwreck.

you have 85% of this article to read

This article is available to subscribers

Midi Free unlimited on all your screens

The journal available as soon as 6 o’clock + the continuous access to the premium zone + the special edition of the evening exclusive.

Post Comment